SREENIVASAN M. Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners in these writ petitions, who are retired Commandants of the Central Industrial Security Force, challenge the penalty imposed on them resulting in 10% reduction of pensionary benefits. Both the petitioners would allege that their service in CISF was unblemished and the penalties imposed upon them were quite illegal. The petitioner in WP (C) No. 12481 of 2011 was the Senior Commandant who demitted his office on 31/12/2006 and the petitioner in WP (C) No. 28932 of 2011 was the Deputy Commandant of the CISF who demitted his office on 31/10/2009.

(2.) Disciplinary proceedings by invoking R.9 of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 read with R.14 of CCS (CCA) Rules were initiated against the petitioners alleging that in the recruitment process which occurred in the year 2005 in which the petitioners were the members of the Board, there occurred impersonation of selection of one Ajay kumar. The grievance of the petitioners is that the disciplinary action was initiated against them in violation of the Rules and norms and the penalty imposed is shockingly disproportionate to the gravity of the charges. They would allege that no prosecution was initiated against the aforesaid Ajay Kumar and he retired without any stigma. It is in this background that the petitioners have came up before this Court.

(3.) In the counter - affidavit filed by the respondents, they justified the stand. According to them, the petitioners were given full opportunity to defend their case during the course of enquiry. It was, however, added that there is no provision under the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 for grant of personal hearing by the disciplinary authority before the imposition of penalty. According to them, the petitioner in WP (C) No. 28932 of 2011 was the Chairman of the Recruitment of Constables and the petitioner in WP (C) No. 12481 of 2011 was one of the members. The respondents allege that when the candidate Ajay Kumar with roll No. 5600044 was reported at the Recruitment Centre, his physical measurement and examination of the documents was re - checked by a Board of Officers. On that re - checking, his actual handwriting did not tally with the one available in the answer sheet reportedly written by him during the examination of Constables and both the handwritings were entirely different. For the purpose of verifying the fact, the original answer sheet and specimen handwriting of Shri. Ajay Kumar were sent to Central Forensic Laboratory, Central Bureau of Investigation, New Delhi for scientific examination and expert opinion. The report received from there confirmed that the answer sheet in respect of Shri. Ajay Kumar was written by some other person. Moreover, the physical measurement of the candidate was taken by the Board. The height and chest of Shri. Ajay Kumar was recorded as 179 cms and 81-87 cms respectively. When his physical measurement was re - checked at the recruitment training centre, his height and chest measurements were found as 169 cms and 80-83 cms respectively. This, according to the respondents, was due to the failure on the part of the petitioners to discharge their duties effectively. On enquiry, the cases against the petitioners were found to be proved and thus, they justified the action against the petitioners.